Case: 4:15-cv-01137-CAS Doc.

#: 52 Filed: 10/23/15 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #: 1784

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

CHARLES C. JOHNSON, et al.,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiffs,
v.
GAWKER MEDIA, LLC, et al.,
Defendants.

No. 4:15-CV-1137 CAS

ORDER
This matter is before the Court on review of the file. On October 22, 2015, plaintiffs filed
among other documents a motion for leave to file a first amended complaint (Doc. 45). The Courts
Order of October 19, 2015 stated in part:
[W]hen leave to file a document is required, the document for which leave is sought
must be submitted as an attachment to the motion for leave, and not filed as a
separate document. See Administrative Procedures for Case Management/Electronic
Case Filing, Sec. II.B.
Order at 2 (Doc. 44). Despite this clear direction, plaintiffs did not attach their proposed amended
complaint to the motion for leave to file an amended complaint, and instead filed it as a separate
document, twice. See Docs. 47, 50. Plaintiffs docketed their proposed amended complaint as a
Motion to Supplement and a Supplement.
The Court will strike plaintiffs proposed amended complaints from the record for filing
error, as they were filed without leave of Court. In the interest of efficiency, the Court will direct
the Clerk of the Court to attach a copy of plaintiffs proposed first amended complaint to plaintiffs
Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs are cautioned that the Court will not
take similar corrective action on their behalf in the future.

Case: 4:15-cv-01137-CAS Doc. #: 52 Filed: 10/23/15 Page: 2 of 2 PageID #: 1785

Plaintiffs attention is also directed to Section II.F. of the Courts Administrative Procedures
for Case Management/Case Filing, which requires that [e]ach exhibit is to be filed as a separate .pdf
attachment. Each such attachment should be identified by a name that includes both the exhibit
designation and a brief description of the exhibit[.] (Emphasis added). Plaintiffs filed numerous
exhibits and included a brief description of each, but failed to include an exhibit designation for any
of the exhibits. See Section II.F., Administrative Procedures for Case Management/Case Filing, for
an example of a correct exhibit name format. The Court will not order plaintiffs to refile their
exhibits on this occasion, but expects future filings to include proper exhibit name identification.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs proposed amended complaints are STRICKEN
from the record for filing error, and the Clerk of the Court shall delete them from the record. [Docs.
47, 50]
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall terminate plaintiffs Motion
to Supplement for filing error. [Doc. 47]
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall attach one copy of plaintiffs
proposed amended complaint to plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint (Doc.
45).

CHARLES A. SHAW
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated this 23rd day of October, 2015.